tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post7798864455898085027..comments2024-03-28T16:45:51.051+00:00Comments on The IPKat: Friday fantasiesVerónica RodrÃguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-74456167977304460742014-08-17T11:43:23.545+01:002014-08-17T11:43:23.545+01:00My experiences in the UK Patent Office in the 1970...My experiences in the UK Patent Office in the 1970's and 80's are consistent with the researcher's conclusions. The higher the output, the sooner the promotion to Senior Examiner. The technique adopted by certain individuals was to only search the most recent documents and not search in other headings where prior art might be found. The fewer the citations, the shorter the official letter. Only the search and the issue of the first examination report counted to wards output. We had one individual drafted in to help out on a temporary basis where I had to re-search his cases (for which I got no performance points) and apologise to the applicant in the next official letter for the newly-cited, highly relevant, prior art not having been found earlier. <br /><br />The more responsible examiners just shrugged it off, as it just meant that they got promoted a couple of years later than the high performers, and you would all end up at the top of the senior examiner pay scale eventually. However, when performance related pay was introduced in the late 1980's, not only was there possibility of these high output examiners jumping pay steps, but there were extra points above the normal scale maximum that were only available to those with high performance (= high output), which was rather demotivating to those who did things properly. <br />ex-examinernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-57126897487364149022014-08-15T16:24:17.792+01:002014-08-15T16:24:17.792+01:00RE:Re: Peter Principle where people are promoted t...RE:Re: Peter Principle where people are promoted to until they reach their position of incompetence, and then of course they won't be promoted further. <br /><br />20 years ago in school, we were forbidden to think that we are not familiar with a problem or cannot do something. instead we had to start estimating the time and way to a solution/result. <br /><br />My modest opinion, probably known since long time ago, is that people are promoted in a way to minimise (financial)efforts while maximising the result of <i>a system as whole</i>. That means that individual promotion depends on parameters/parts of the system and only partially depends on personal performance.<br /><br />About examiners, doing things fast is a matter of training. If one trains a specific skill, one gets this specific skill. Nothing else... <br /><br />Also, Anon 1312 forgets about motivation of examiners. Professionals, they like cars, ones that drive fast, safe with beautiful design cost more. When you think to buy a car, some concessions to be made. <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-39263917600516624002014-08-15T13:12:07.561+01:002014-08-15T13:12:07.561+01:00Re: high ranking Examiners letting marginal cases ...Re: high ranking Examiners letting marginal cases through, reminds me of the Peter Principle where people are promoted to until they reach their position of incompetence, and then of course they won't be promoted further.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com